A divided Supreme Court has upheld & extended the Johnson exclusion zone, notes Anna Macey
Before a seven panel member of the Supreme Court, a majority of four to three held that a failure to observe contractual dismissal procedures could not give rise to a claim for damages for breach of contract at common law. The majority held that damages for a flawed disciplinary process were inextricably connected to the dismissal itself, for which Parliament had provided a remedy in the form of unfair dismissal. These claims therefore fell within the Johnson exclusion zone, which was both upheld and extended, to cover express terms of contract.
The facts
The two cases of Edwards v Chesterfield Royal Hospital NHS Foundation and Botham v Ministry of Defence [2011] UKSC 58, [2011] All ER (D) 101 (Dec) were conjoined for this appeal.
Mr Edwards was a consultant surgeon, summarily dismissed following a disciplinary panel’s findings that he inappropriately examined a female patient. He argued that, in breach of an express term of his contract, the disciplinary panel did not include a legally qualified
